About your Search

20121101
20121130
STATION
MSNBCW 8
MSNBC 7
WHUT (Howard University Television) 4
KNTV (NBC) 2
KQED (PBS) 2
WETA 2
WBAL (NBC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 27
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)
rick santorum that have really been problems for them going forward with key problems with the electorate. they're more a c plus candidate, but this thing of not -- it's not adjust good government thing. the obama campaign by not putting forward a big, positive agenda, left the playing field open to romney. chris: the base -- it's a b. a b minus for romney. that's how it works out among the four. we will be covering the cliff hanger late tuesday night. right through the victory and the concession speeches. i love concession speesms. we're going to do a better survey and predictors than ever before in television history of course. it's great, however, to look back at how this medium, television, our tv forefathers lacked, all the stuff we have today. take a look at john cameron swayze. he's on the far left there. on the very first presidential election night on television. 1948. >> governor thomas e. dewey. today conceded the presidential election to president truman. >> when you see the restrained glee of the democratic headquarters and the unabashed sadness, emptiness
. remember, he went in and destroyed rick santorum, destroyed newt gingrich with huge amounts of super pac money. you can do that and clear the field for yourself in the primaries in the caucuses and you can destroy house members. is that still true with big money? >> i believe both those statements are still true. look, in house races you still have -- the media markets are small enough that a relative small amount of money can provide the loudest megaphone in the race, louder than the candidates themselves. and so they can still influence those races. that's certainly true. and, look, there's no other way to explain the way that mitt romney got the republican nomination than through the kind of metaphorical equivalent of firebombing at dresden when it came to rick perry, newt gingrich, and rick santorum. despite all the problems with the republican base, he won through overwhelming financial force and a lot of that money did come from restore our future from the super pac that was backing him. he could not have been the nominee had it not been for that money. >> michael, i want you to re
with newt gingrich, rick santorum, rick perry and fight for 15 months before they look up in may and say, okay, now we have to open field offices. the obama field offices were there a year and a half. multiple ones in every one of these states and they were out there meeting these voters al o an individual basis. these weren't just numbers. they were human beings -- >> you can't get elected on the young vote. i looked at the numbers, and these numbers of young voters were better than last time for obama. who would have predicted that. >> well, they went -- and they also -- they had time to change the makeup of the electorate. florida, they went and registered new voters. they wrej centregistered these . look at the state of ohio. all of the pollster conspiracy, polling conspiracy theorists would say no way democrats are going to have a party i.d. advantage of six, seven, eight points in the state of ohio. well, they had a seven-point advantage. that wasn't -- that didn't just happen. they went and got itdone. they went and did voter registration in specific places because the other thin
huckabee and rick santorum and others who are thinking about running for president next time. people are going to have to choose up sides and if president obama is leading those negotiations it's going to be an obama deal so for a lot of republicans in congress and around the country they're against it no matter what. they don't care what percentage of the vote he got, how big his mandate is, they'll be against it because it will have revenue in it, new revenue, and they'll be against it. >> rose: because it is -- that vote is influenced by how they perceive the battle they are making for the control of the republican party? >> and they don't like him and anything he stands for and his victory won't change that. and choosing up sides there will tell you a lot about how people are going to approach going forward the next four years of an obama presidency and the fight to redefine the republican party. >> it's going to be -- i mean, regardless of what happens tomorrow i think we come out of this pretty much where we went into it and that's what makes it very disheartening, frankly, as
director for rick santorum's presidential campaign. great to have you here and ruth, petraeus now testifying or will be testifying on capitol hill. does this bring it all back to the original story and the attention and focus where it needs to be about what happened in benghazi, the loss of four american diplomats and away from this salacious sexual scandal. >> i think you answered your own question. i say this with a bit of regret and also a bit of humor, as between dealing with serious substantive questions whether it's benghazi or the fiscal cliff and salacious sexual scandal, i know which we think is going to get the attention and especially this story which is developing into some combination of real housewives of centcom meets "homeland," it's just too sordidly delicious not to have us spending, us in the immediate yashgs spending some time figuring out what in the heck was going on here. i do have to say i really think there are a lot of important questions to be dealt with at the news conference beyond the petraeus matter. there's not a lot that the president can say or ad
, would it have been better to have gingrich or santorum or perry or bachmann? who was the alternative at least this time around? who was it? >> i personally would say jon huntsman would have had the best chance. he couldn't get through the primary process. >> because they couldn't see his values. >> also, they started their campaign off doing something you probably shouldn't do, kicking your own party around. >> are you forgetting the hermanator? >> as richard said, the primary process rewards extremes in many cases. so how could a guy like -- let's say jeb bush, this is just for argument's sake, 2016, how does he get through a primary process given his stances on things like immigration? can jeb bush survive that process? >> jeb bush can survive it, chris christie can survive it. it's just what i say on immigration reform. you don't go half in. you don't stick your toe in the water and then have a blogger write something nasty about you, then pull it back. you keep going in and you crush the blogger and you keep moving. and if somebody that's an extremist on talk radio attacks you, y
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)